VEREP Property Development Analysis

Strategic Assessment of Development Opportunities

Author

HDAdvisors

Published

December 1, 2025

Executive Summary

This analysis examines properties with fewer than 30 Sunday attendees, focusing on development potential through five key metrics: land value, zoning/density, acreage, environmental limitations, and Qualified Census Tract (QCT) status.

Key Findings

This analysis evaluated 126 properties across the diocese to identify optimal development opportunities. We identified 10 high-priority properties representing 69.1 total acres with significant development potential.

Top Insights:

  • 44 properties score in Tier 1-2 (strong development potential)
  • Primary opportunities: Underutilized parking lots and open space
  • Average parcel size: 2.8 acres
  • Congregations with declining pledges: 7 properties show high financial need
126
Properties Analyzed
10
High Priority Sites
69.1
Developable Acres
7
Financial Need

0.1 At a Glance: Top 10 Properties

Rank Property Address City Acres Score Tier
1 10520 MAIN ST, FAIRFAX 22030 FAIRFAX 4.1 85 High Potential
2 1 TRURO LN, FAIRFAX 22030 FAIRFAX 3.4 85 High Potential
3 AQUIA HARBOUR 22554 AQUIA HARBOUR 31.4 85 High Potential
4 3241 BRUSH DR, FALLS CHURCH 22042 FALLS CHURCH 5.6 85 High Potential
5 WEST FALLS CHURCH 22042 WEST FALLS CHURCH 2.6 85 High Potential
6 3421 FRANCONIA RD, ALEXANDRIA 22310 ALEXANDRIA 4.4 85 High Potential
7 37018 GLENDALE ST, PURCELLVILLE 20132 PURCELLVILLE 2.0 85 High Potential
8 2918 RICHMOND HWY, STAFFORD 22554 STAFFORD 8.1 85 High Potential
9 3439 PAYNE ST, FALLS CHURCH 22041 FALLS CHURCH 2.2 85 High Potential
10 10627 PATTERSON AVE, HENRICO 23238 HENRICO 5.1 85 High Potential

1 Key Findings

1.1 Significant Underutilized Assets

44 properties score in Tier 1-2 (strong development potential), representing substantial untapped value across the diocese. Primary opportunities exist in:

  • Parking lots (highest development scores): Structured parking with mixed-use above
  • Open space parcels: Well-located vacant land ideal for ground lease arrangements
  • Properties with declining congregations: Sites where development can provide financial stability

1.2 Geographic Distribution

Development opportunities are distributed across Virginia, with concentrations in:

  • Urban/suburban areas with strong walkability scores
  • Markets with favorable demographics and LIHTC eligibility
  • Transit-accessible locations supporting reduced parking requirements

1.3 Financial Sustainability Imperative

7 of the top 10 properties are associated with congregations showing significant financial decline (pledge revenue down 20%+ over past decade). Strategic development can provide:

  • Long-term ground lease revenue
  • Capital for building improvements
  • Sustainable financial model for congregation vitality

2 Methodology & Data

2.1 Background & Data Sources

2.1.1 VEREP Parcel Dataset

This analysis utilizes the Virginia Episcopal Real Estate Portfolio (VEREP) parcel dataset, compiled by CGS Consultants. The dataset includes:

  • 126 parcels across Virginia

  • Comprehensive property characteristics (size, use, zoning)

  • Environmental constraints (floodplains, wetlands, easements)

  • Location metrics (walkability, transit access)

  • Market indicators (median income, demographics)

2.1.2 Congregation Statistics (2014-2023)

Financial and membership data provides context on congregation health:

  • Sunday attendance trends
  • Membership changes
  • Plate & pledge revenue
  • 10-year trend analysis
Data Quality Note

Not all properties have associated congregation data. Properties without congregation information received neutral scores in the financial need category.

2.2 Analytical Framework

2.2.1 Development Potential Scoring

Our methodology evaluates six key dimensions:

Constraint Penalties: Properties receive deductions for flood zones (-40), significant wetlands (-35), easements (-30), and historic district designation (-25).

2.2.2 Development Tiers

Properties are classified into five tiers based on composite scores:

  • Tier 1 (75-100): High Priority - Immediate development candidates
  • Tier 2 (60-74): Strong Potential - Near-term opportunities
  • Tier 3 (45-59): Moderate Potential - Requires creative solutions
  • Tier 4 (30-44): Limited Potential - Significant barriers exist
  • Tier 5 (<30): Not Recommended - Unsuitable for development

2.3 Understanding the Development Criteria

2.3.1 Why These Factors Matter

Our scoring methodology reflects decades of real estate development experience and incorporates both market realities and mission-aligned priorities. Each criterion was selected to balance financial viability with community impact, ensuring that recommended properties can support sustainable development while serving congregational needs.

2.3.1.1 Property Size: The Goldilocks Principle

Optimal Range: 0.5-5 acres

Property size significantly influences development feasibility, but bigger isn’t always better. Properties under a quarter-acre typically lack the critical mass needed for financially viable development—construction costs per unit rise sharply, and parking or open space requirements become impossible to meet. Conversely, parcels exceeding 10 acres often present unique challenges: they may require complex phasing, demand substantial upfront capital, or face community resistance to density.

The “sweet spot” of 0.5-5 acres aligns with typical mixed-use development projects. A half-acre can accommodate a modest 20-30 unit building with ground-floor retail or community space. Two to three acres enables more ambitious projects—perhaps 75-100 residential units, structured parking, and meaningful ground-floor activation. Properties in this range also match the investment thresholds of most community development corporations and mission-driven developers who are natural partners for faith-based institutions.

2.3.1.2 Current Use: Identifying Low-Hanging Fruit

Highest Potential: Parking Lots and Open Space

Not all church property serves its highest and best use. Surface parking lots represent prime redevelopment opportunities—they’re already cleared and graded, typically have minimal environmental constraints, and often sit underutilized six days per week. A parking lot that serves 200 congregants on Sunday morning but stands empty Monday through Saturday represents an enormous opportunity cost.

Open space scores similarly high, particularly when it’s amenity-free lawn rather than programmed recreation or memorial gardens. These properties can be reimagined while potentially retaining some green space within new development.

Conversely, active church buildings score lower not because development is impossible, but because it’s complex. Any project must navigate active programming, potential relocation needs, and the emotional attachment congregations feel toward sacred spaces. Cemeteries score lowest—they’re essentially undevelopable under most state laws and carry profound cultural sensitivities.

2.3.1.3 Location Quality: Following the Market

Key Metrics: Walkability Score and Transit Access

Real estate development fundamentally responds to location. A walkable, transit-rich site commands higher rents, attracts more diverse tenants, and often qualifies for density bonuses or reduced parking requirements—all factors that improve project economics.

Walkability scores measure proximity to everyday needs: grocery stores, schools, employment centers, healthcare. High walkability (15-20 on our scale) indicates a property can support car-light or car-free households, expanding the potential tenant base to include young professionals, seniors aging in place, and lower-income families for whom car ownership is cost-prohibitive.

Transit access amplifies these benefits. Properties within a quarter-mile of frequent bus service or half-mile of rail stations can often negotiate reduced parking requirements with municipalities—a significant cost savings when structured parking runs $25,000-$40,000 per space to construct.

2.3.1.4 Financial Need: Aligning Development with Mission

Priority: Congregations with Declining Resources

This criterion explicitly centers mission over pure market return. Congregations experiencing sustained pledge declines often face a difficult reality: their historic buildings demand expensive maintenance, but shrinking budgets make upkeep increasingly burdensome. Many such congregations sit on valuable real estate that could, through thoughtful development, generate steady income streams while maintaining their worship and ministry.

A ground lease arrangement, for example, might provide a struggling congregation with $50,000-$150,000 annually in stable income—enough to fund a part-time rector, maintain the building, and sustain core ministries. This approach transforms real estate from a drain on resources into a mission enabler.

Properties associated with growing congregations score lower not because they lack development potential, but because the urgency is less acute. These communities likely have more options and less immediate financial pressure.

2.3.1.5 Market Potential: Reading Economic Signals

Indicator: Area Median Income and LIHTC Eligibility

Development must respond to market demand. Properties in higher-income areas (median incomes above $75,000) typically support market-rate housing, ground-floor retail, or mixed-use projects that can cross-subsidize affordable components. These projects attract conventional financing and a broader range of development partners.

Properties in Qualified Census Tracts (QCTs) gain additional scoring weight because they unlock Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) financing—the nation’s primary mechanism for affordable housing production. LIHTC projects in QCTs receive point advantages in competitive funding rounds, improving their feasibility. For mission-driven institutions committed to affordable housing, QCT properties offer a rare alignment of social impact and financial viability.

2.3.1.6 Zoning: Navigating Regulatory Reality

Favorable: Mixed-Use, Commercial, and Residential Districts

Zoning powerfully shapes what’s buildable and how quickly projects move from concept to construction. Properties zoned for residential or mixed-use development typically offer by-right development opportunities—projects that don’t require lengthy rezoning processes, conditional use permits, or special exceptions.

Conversely, properties in restrictive single-family or conservation districts may require multi-year regulatory processes, neighborhood opposition, and uncertain outcomes. While such projects occasionally succeed, they demand patient capital and sophisticated development partners.

2.3.1.7 Environmental and Regulatory Constraints: Deal-Breakers vs. Speed-Bumps

Critical: Flood Zones, Wetlands, Easements, Historic Districts

These constraints receive substantial score penalties because they materially affect project feasibility and cost. Properties in 100-year floodplains face expensive flood insurance, elevated construction costs, and increasingly cautious lenders post-climate-change. Development in such areas may be technically possible but financially marginal.

Significant wetlands (>25% of parcel) trigger federal and state permitting, potential mitigation requirements, and uncertainty about buildable area. Easements—particularly those held by third parties—can restrict development rights, limit building envelopes, or prevent property subdivision.

Historic district designation doesn’t prohibit development but adds layers of design review, material requirements, and timeline uncertainty. Some historic commissions embrace creative contemporary additions; others mandate strict historicism that may conflict with modern construction economics.

2.3.2 Bringing It All Together

These six criteria, combined with constraint penalties, create a holistic picture of development potential. A property might score exceptionally well on size and location but face significant challenges from environmental constraints. Another might have modest physical attributes but represent an urgent opportunity to support a financially stressed congregation.

The weighted scoring system allows us to compare apples to oranges—to evaluate whether a small, perfectly-located property in a historic district outweighs a larger, unrestricted site with less market demand. This methodology doesn’t make decisions for stakeholders but rather creates a common language for discussing trade-offs and priorities.

Ultimately, successful church real estate development requires more than high scores. It demands patient capital, mission-aligned partners, engaged congregations, and creative design. But by systematically evaluating these criteria, we can identify the properties where stars align—where market demand, congregational need, and regulatory environment converge to create genuine opportunity.

3 Analysis Results

3.1 Development Opportunity Landscape

3.2 Geographic Distribution

3.3 Data Quality Issues

One of the issues identified by CGS’s initial study was that a large number of congregations either had incomplete or inconsistent data; many congregations share properties or fail to appropriately report their permanent address. Their final output data, which was utilized for this development analysis, reflected this. While environmental constraints accounted for the majority of the missing data, many others contained incomplete property information. For a closer look, we separated and classified these attributes below. These properties can be more precisely assessed for development once they have greater data.

Metric Value
Total properties analyzed 126
Properties with incomplete data 121 (96%)
Properties with missing/unassigned addresses 19
Properties Without Coordinates

5 properties have neither valid addresses nor coordinates. These will require manual lookup using county tax records or additional dioses review.

3.3.1 Missing and Unassigned Addresses

The following congregations comprise the 19 “properties” without proper street addresses, making them difficult to verify or inspect for development. 3 of these congregations (comprising 14 of the total 19) had coordinates, which allowed for reverse geocoding to identify the likely address or zip code.

Congregation # Unassigned Properties Cities Has Coordinates
St Johns Episcopal Church 6 WEST POINT, UNASSIGNED Yes
St Pauls Church 6 WEST POINT Yes
St Stephens Church 2 UNASSIGNED Yes
Church of the Spirit 1 NA No
La Iglesia de San Jose 1 NA No
Olivet Church 1 NA No
St Andrews Church 1 NA No
St Francis Korean Church 1 NA No
Congregation # Properties Cities Geocoded Address
St Johns Episcopal Church 6 WEST POINT, UNASSIGNED 916 Main Street, West Point, VA, 23181, USA
St Pauls Church 6 WEST POINT 532 15th St, West Point, VA, 23181, USA
St Stephens Church 2 UNASSIGNED 20119, Catlett, VA, USA

3.3.2 Shared Addresses

These properties have different congregations sharing the same street address, indicating potential shared facilities, rental arrangements, or data quality issues.

Findings

2 addresses are shared by multiple congregations, affecting 5 different congregations.

Properties sharing addresses may indicate:

  1. Ethnic/language congregations sharing space (Korean, Vietnamese, Spanish services)
  2. Church plants using host congregation facilities
  3. Rental arrangements - one congregation renting to another
  4. Merged congregations - maintaining separate legal entities
  5. Data quality issues - duplicate records or address errors
Street Address City # Congregations Congregation Names Combined Attendance
WARSAW 22572 WARSAW 3 North Farnham Parish Church &#124; St Johns Church &#124; St Pauls Church Nomini Grove 116
UNASSIGNED, WEST POINT 23181 WEST POINT 2 St Johns Episcopal Church &#124; St Pauls Church 140

3.3.3 Priority Issues Summary

Problem Distribution:

Issue Type # Congregations
All addresses unique and assigned 20
Has unassigned addresses 6
Has shared addresses 3
Both shared AND unassigned 2

4 Summary Statistics

4.1 Property Portfolio Overview

4.1.1 Property Use Types

4.2 Geographic Distribution

4.2.1 Parcels by Diocesan Region

# Parcels Total Acres % of Total Acreage Avg Dev Score
126 339 100 52.9

4.3 Congregation Vitality Metrics

Key Congregation Metrics:

  • Parcels with congregation data: 126
  • Parcels with <30 Sunday attendance: 126 (100% of properties analyzed)
  • Average Sunday attendance: 16 people
  • Average annual pledge: $49,047
  • Congregations with declining pledges: 70

4.4 Developable Land Summary

4.4.1 Comprehensive Developability Analysis

All Developable Properties (Score ≥45)

44

Developable Parcels

192.1

Developable Acres

$18.7M

Assessed Value

1

With <30 Attendance

4.4.2 Breakdown by Development Tier

Tier # Parcels Total Acres Assessed Value
High Potential 30 146.1 18,124,500
Moderate Potential 14 46.0 553,409

5 Property Profiles

5.1 Overview

The following section provides detailed profiles for each of the top 10 development opportunities. Each profile includes:

  • Site characteristics and current use
  • Congregation context (where applicable)
  • Development opportunities and strategies
  • Key considerations and next steps

Property #1

5.1.1 10520 MAIN ST, FAIRFAX 22030

FAIRFAX, FAIRFAX-CITY County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

4.11 acres
Property Size

16.3/100
Walkability

25 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.1.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Church building

5.1.1.2 Congregation: Holy Cross Korean Episcopal Church

Financial Trend: Plate & pledge has ↑ increased by 42% over the past decade.

5.1.1.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

🚶 Walkable location: Transit access supports reduced parking requirements and higher density

Property #2

5.1.2 1 TRURO LN, FAIRFAX 22030

FAIRFAX, FAIRFAX-CITY County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

3.44 acres
Property Size

16.3/100
Walkability

25 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.2.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Open space

5.1.2.2 Congregation: Holy Cross Korean Episcopal Church

Financial Trend: Plate & pledge has ↑ increased by 42% over the past decade.

5.1.2.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

🚶 Walkable location: Transit access supports reduced parking requirements and higher density

Property #3

5.1.3 AQUIA HARBOUR 22554

AQUIA HARBOUR, STAFFORD County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

31.38 acres
Property Size

6.8/100
Walkability

0 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.3.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Open space

5.1.3.2 Congregation: Aquia Church

Financial Trend: Plate & pledge has ↓ decreased by 100% over the past decade.

5.1.3.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

Property #4

5.1.4 3241 BRUSH DR, FALLS CHURCH 22042

FALLS CHURCH, FAIRFAX County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

5.64 acres
Property Size

13/100
Walkability

21 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.4.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Church building

5.1.4.2 Congregation: St Patricks Anglo Vietnamese Church

Financial Trend: Plate & pledge has ↓ decreased by 55.2% over the past decade.

5.1.4.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

🚶 Walkable location: Transit access supports reduced parking requirements and higher density

Property #5

5.1.5 WEST FALLS CHURCH 22042

WEST FALLS CHURCH, FAIRFAX County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

2.62 acres
Property Size

13/100
Walkability

21 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.5.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Church building, Open space

5.1.5.2 Congregation: St Patricks Anglo Vietnamese Church

Financial Trend: Plate & pledge has ↓ decreased by 55.2% over the past decade.

5.1.5.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

🚶 Walkable location: Transit access supports reduced parking requirements and higher density

Property #6

5.1.6 3421 FRANCONIA RD, ALEXANDRIA 22310

ALEXANDRIA, FAIRFAX County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

4.39 acres
Property Size

11/100
Walkability

28 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.6.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Church building

5.1.6.2 Congregation: All Saints Sharon Chapel

5.1.6.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

🚶 Walkable location: Transit access supports reduced parking requirements and higher density

Property #7

5.1.7 37018 GLENDALE ST, PURCELLVILLE 20132

PURCELLVILLE, LOUDOUN County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

2.02 acres
Property Size

8.5/100
Walkability

0 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.7.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Church building

5.1.7.2 Congregation: St Peters Church

Financial Trend: Plate & pledge has ↓ decreased by 100% over the past decade.

5.1.7.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

Property #8

5.1.8 2918 RICHMOND HWY, STAFFORD 22554

STAFFORD, STAFFORD County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

8.15 acres
Property Size

6.8/100
Walkability

0 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.8.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Church building

5.1.8.2 Congregation: Aquia Church

Financial Trend: Plate & pledge has ↓ decreased by 100% over the past decade.

5.1.8.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

Property #9

5.1.9 3439 PAYNE ST, FALLS CHURCH 22041

FALLS CHURCH, FAIRFAX County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

2.24 acres
Property Size

18.3/100
Walkability

0 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.9.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Church building

5.1.9.2 Congregation: St Pauls Church

5.1.9.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

🚶 Walkable location: Transit access supports reduced parking requirements and higher density

Property #10

5.1.10 10627 PATTERSON AVE, HENRICO 23238

HENRICO, HENRICO County

Development Score: 85/100

High Potential

5.08 acres
Property Size

8.3/100
Walkability

0 people
Avg Attendance

5.1.10.1 Site Characteristics

  • Current Uses: Church building

5.1.10.2 Congregation: St Bartholomews Episcopal Church

5.1.10.3 Development Opportunities

📐 Substantial site: Large parcel enables phased development or creative master planning

Appendices

Scoring Algorithm Details

Each property receives scores across six dimensions (0-100 scale), which are then weighted and combined:

  1. Size Score (20% weight): Properties between 0.5-5 acres score highest (100 points)
  2. Use Score (25% weight): Parking lots (95) and open space (90) score highest
  3. Location Score (20% weight): Based on walkability index and transit access
  4. Financial Score (15% weight): Congregation pledge trends indicate development need
  5. Market Score (10% weight): Area median income and LIHTC eligibility
  6. Zoning Score (10% weight): Development-friendly zoning receives 80 points

Constraint penalties are applied after the weighted average, with major penalties for: - Flood zones: -40 points - Significant wetlands (>25%): -35 points
- Easements: -30 points - Historic districts: -25 points

Final scores are capped between 0-100.

Congregation-Parcel Joining: Properties were matched to congregation data using the congr_name field. Properties without matches received neutral financial scores.

Missing Data Handling: - Missing walkability scores defaulted to 0 - Missing income data received median market scores (50) - Properties without area or coordinates were excluded

Quality Filters: - Minimum parcel size: 0.1 acres - Required valid lat/lon coordinates - Valid building years: 1700-2025